We could afford him but if any of the other big clubs want him there is no way he will come here.

We never enter into a bidding war with other clubs for top players, and if he had the choice of playing for Chelsea, Man U or us, we have to guarantee that our only top quality players are going to stay here, Ozil and Sanchez.

If they don't sign new contracts I would think Mbappe is not going to be tempted by Ramsey, Chamberlain and Walcott, as much as he is by Pogba, Mata, Mkhitayran or Hazard, Pedro or Kante.

I'd imagine Mpabbe being so sought after his agent could demand wages between 80-120k. Can't see us giving a young player that much. Obviously its all conjecture and opinion at this point.

I think if you can justify a 30m+ fee you can justify 80k+ a week. Someone like Madrid might offer Aguero 250k but I'd bet they'd offer under 100k for this guy or else they'd have 20 players on 100-300k.

I'd be interested to know if we still hold our stepping stone status for youngsters. The biggest pull Arsenal had 5 years ago was that we we're in the CL and if you were talented you'd be in the first team and wages were probably above average for teenagers. Thinking back to moves like Fabregas, Ox and Ramsey I'm sure I remember hearing "I'm here because Arsenal give young players a chance" which is fair enough but I don't really associate that with us anymore, even though Wilsh, Ramsey, Theo, Szczesny and Gibbs fitted into that before and Bellerin and Iwobi (Maybe Chambers too) are probably good examples of it now.

I agree. But we are very stringent with our cash and will only invest big on proven quality. At this point Mbappe is still only potential, potential that we cannot afford to gamble on (or choose not to due to Wenger, again conjecture) as his career could still go either way.

The big money clubs have the privalige of being able to gamble on potential whilst we perhaps do not IMO.

I dunno, 15m for Chamberlain with the state of our finances back then is probably as much of a financial hit as 50m+ on a teenager in 2017.

I think it's more about status, e.g. that we don't want to be seen as the club that was willing to pay 55m for an unproven Martial. Even now you could argue Mustafi and Xhaka's pedigree (and obviously Alexis Ozil) but Wenger isn't going to be the guy who's record transfer is 18 years old, even though he could make it happen.

I agree. But we are very stringent with our cash and will only invest big on proven quality. At this point Mbappe is still only potential, potential that we cannot afford to gamble on (or choose not to due to Wenger, again conjecture) as his career could still go either way.

The big money clubs have the privalige of being able to gamble on potential whilst we perhaps do not IMO.

Surely then this is exactly why we need to gamble more often on potential? The likes of Dembele for example would be been a cheap gamble if that, same goes for Dybala. The club cannot expect to land an Ozil or Alexis whenever, that's just not sustainable and we've seen how we simply can't compete for the top tier otherwise.

With the way the wages have skyrocketed in the last few years the likes of Grieezman and Reus are quite frankly out of reach and even if they weren't the fact this club isn't known for winning big anymore can prove a problem regardless.

The club has to show much more guile and boldness when it comes to identifying and recruiting potential stars going forward that's for sure.

Agree with this. I'm not sure how solid Arsenal's position is to secure talent on a long term basis if they come good. Wouldn't take long for a Barca, Real, Bayern etc offer more consistent opportunities to win things along with better wages to unsettle a player. If we get to a point where a talent that has come good only has 2 two years on his deal our position is comprised.

Generally speaking now and in the future we have to be smart with our money. I'm firmly against spending major money on young talents.